Tvl.J.F.International vs. The Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes

Held

The Court held that the impugned assessment order was arbitrary and in violation of the principles of natural justice. The Court found that the petitioner had consistently expressed their readiness and willingness to produce books of accounts in their various replies. However, the assessment order was based on an alleged deposition by the petitioner that they were not maintaining books of accounts, a statement whose supporting document (the statement itself) was not reflected in the assessment order. The Court noted that the Assessing Officer had blindly accepted this alleged statement without independent assessment, contrary to the principle laid down in M/s.Amutha Metals Vs. The Commercial Tax Officer, where it was held that such statements must be independently considered with valid reasons. The Court also found that the objections raised by the petitioner regarding their input tax credit claim as per GSTR-3B were not duly considered. Consequently, the Court quashed the assessment order and remanded the matter back to the second respondent for fresh consideration, with a direction to provide sufficient opportunity, including a personal hearing, within eight weeks.

Facts

The petitioner, Tvl.J.F.International, filed a writ petition challenging an assessment order dated 08.11.2019 passed by the second respondent, the State Tax Officer (Intelligence). The petitioner contended that the order was arbitrary, illegal, and violated principles of natural justice. The petitioner argued that they had submitted detailed replies to pre-assessment notices, stating their readiness to produce books of accounts and claiming only eligible input tax credit. However, the respondents allegedly did not consider these objections and passed an order based on an alleged deposition that the petitioner was not maintaining books of accounts. The respondents argued that the petitioner's objections were considered and that the petitioner should have filed a statutory appeal instead of approaching the High Court. They also contended that the petitioner had alleged their books of accounts were lost, supported by an FIR, contradicting their claim of readiness to produce them.

Key Issues

1. Whether the impugned assessment order dated 08.11.2019, passed by the second respondent, is arbitrary and in violation of the principles of natural justice, particularly concerning the consideration of the petitioner's objections and their readiness to produce books of accounts, thereby turning on Section 73 of the CGST Act/SGST Act and the principles of natural justice. Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner argued that their detailed replies, sent on 10.10.2019, 11.10.2019, and 18.10.2019, were not considered. They reiterated their willingness to produce books of accounts and claimed only eligible input tax credit. The assessment order erroneously stated they did not maintain books and their ITC claim was not genuine. They relied on the judgment in M/s.Amutha Metals Vs. The Commercial Tax Officer. Respondents' arguments: The respondents contended that the petitioner's objections were considered in the assessment order. They argued that the petitioner should have filed a statutory appeal under the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and that the writ petition was not maintainable. They also pointed out the petitioner's alleged admission of lost books of accounts and the FIR registered, questioning the petitioner's claim of readiness to produce them.